"If you've found evidence that this wasn't the case, you would have to produce it and explain it properly - which, so far, you haven't succeeded in doing."
-- Trying.

"discarding any details of Plato's"
-- Not really. I said there was a group of people that got too greedy. Those were the hyksos. An extra group of people whose name was lost. I've embraced the story. All of it, really, except for 2 points. The obvious factor of ten issue. And then this one other difference.

"As I said above, if you've found evidence that this was not the case, then"
-- The evidence is the archaeology. Not really my opinions. Been trying to show what I have. What's left. And the best thing is Io. We've got her.


"According to Plato, King Atlas of Atlantis was a mortal son of Poseidon and Cleito."
-- Correct. Cleito is in the list of Danaids. It fits.

"The Titan Atlas was the son of Iapetus and Asia."
-- EXACTLY!!!!!!!! They were two different guys. One was the great descendant. The other was the Titan. It's a key point, realy. There were multiple Aeolus's. Like the guy who went to Tyrhenia. And their stories got combined.

"I can't find any post mentioning Atlas dated 6th September from you in answer to Byrd."
-- "The war is supposed to be the Athenians vs. Atlanteans... and yet the location I chose for the city of Atlantis would seem to be home of the great Greco-Egyptians, and not really a city that an Athens would want to go to war with."

I'm a man of few words sometimes. Thanks for asking the questions.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 10/29/2009 08:10AM by rich.